| Display title | User talk:Psephomancy/CW vs UW |
| Default sort key | Psephomancy/CW vs UW |
| Page length (in bytes) | 934 |
| Namespace ID | 3 |
| Namespace | User_talk |
| Page ID | 2160 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
| Number of subpages of this page | 0 (0 redirects; 0 non-redirects) |
| Edit | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Move | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Delete | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Page creator | BetterVotingAdvocacy (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 05:07, 30 March 2020 |
| Latest editor | BetterVotingAdvocacy (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 05:07, 30 March 2020 |
| Total number of edits | 1 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 180 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | I think it'd be interesting in general for other users to be able to maybe add a "discussion" section to the bottom of talk pages in order to discuss, criticize, support, or just otherwise contribute to a user's talk page. I think the rule around such an idea should be that the added section should be right at the bottom of the talk page, so as not to interfere with the user's intentions, and to clearly indicate that another user is writing most of it, rather than it being made by the original user. For example, for this article, I'd like to say "Many Condorcet advocates would likely counter that voters with weak preferences would most likely equally rank the similar candidates, greatly increasing the odds that the CW will be high-utility and satisfying to as many voters as possible relative to the UW." BetterVotingAdvocacy (talk) 05:07, 30 March 2020 (UTC) |
